Miyabi MCP Bundle

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions optional filtering but doesn't disclose behavioral traits like whether results are paginated, sorted (likely by timestamp), the default time window if 'minutes' is omitted, or what happens if no logs match. For a read operation with zero annotation coverage, this leaves significant gaps.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single, efficient sentence that front-loads the core purpose ('Get recent log entries') and briefly mentions optional filters. There is no wasted text, and it's appropriately sized for a straightforward tool.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool's moderate complexity (3 optional parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is minimally adequate. It covers the basic purpose and filtering scope but lacks details on output format, error handling, or behavioral nuances, leaving the agent to infer from the schema alone.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all three parameters ('source', 'limit', 'minutes') with clear descriptions. The description adds marginal value by summarizing the filtering options but doesn't provide additional semantics beyond what the schema states, such as default values or interaction effects.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the verb ('Get') and resource ('recent log entries') with optional filtering scope. It distinguishes from siblings like 'log_get_errors' and 'log_get_warnings' by focusing on recency rather than severity, but doesn't explicitly contrast with 'log_search' which might offer more advanced filtering.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implies usage for retrieving recent logs with basic filtering by source and time window. However, it doesn't specify when to use this versus alternatives like 'log_search' (which might support more complex queries) or 'log_tail' (for real-time streaming), nor does it mention any prerequisites or exclusions.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.